“A curious artist wrought ’em--
With joints so close as not to be perceived;
Yet are they both each other’s counterparts!
(Her part had Juan inscribed; and his had Laydor;
You know those names were theirs;) and in the midst
A heart divided in two-halfs was placed.
Now if the rivets of those rings, inclosed,
Fit not each other, I have forged this lie,
But if they join, you must for ever part.”
Gimmal rings, though originally double, were, by a further
refinement, made triple and even more complicated, yet the name
remained unchanged.
Herrick, in his “Hesperides,” has the following lines:
“THE JIMMAL RING OR TRUE-LOVE KNOT.
“Thou sent’st to me a true-love knot; but I
Return’d a ring of jimmals, to imply
Thy love had one knot, mine a triple-tye.”
A singular silver gimmal ring was found in Dorset, England; the
legend _Ave Maria_ is partly inscribed on each moiety and legible
only when they are united.[307]
A beautiful enamelled ring of this kind which belonged to Sir Thomas
Gresham, is extant.[308] It opens horizontally, thus forming two
rings, which are, nevertheless, linked together and respectively
inscribed on the inner side with a Scripture posy: QUOD. DEVS.
CONJVNXIT (_what God did join_) is engraved on one half and HOMO
NON SEPARAT, (_let not man separate_), on the other. The ring is
beautifully enamelled. One of the portions is set with a diamond
and the other with a ruby; and corresponding with them, in a cavity
inside the ring, are or rather were within the last twenty years two
minute figures or genii. The workmanship is admirable and probably
Italian.
The reader who may be curious to know more about the gimmal ring,
and the probable derivation of the word _Gimmal_, is referred to a
learned and interesting article by Robert Smith, Esq., in the London
Archæologia, vol. xii. p. 7.
It is possible that Shakspeare was thinking of gimmal rings, some of
which had engraven on them a hand with a heart in it, when (in the
_Tempest_) he makes Ferdinand say to Miranda “Here’s my hand” and she
answers “And mine, with my heart in it.”
§ 2. Coupled with the love of youth for maiden, we have one of the
most simple and perfect of old English sonnets (by Davison):[309]
“PURE AND ENDLESS.”
“If you would _know_ the love which you I bear,
Compare it to the ring which your fair hand
Shall make MORE precious, when _you_ shall it wear:
So _my love’s_ nature you shall understand.
Is it of metal _pure_? So endless is _my_ love,
Unless you it destroy with your disdain.
Doth it the purer grow the more ’tis tried?
So doth my love; yet herein they dissent:
That whereas gold, the more ’tis purified,
By growing less, doth show some part is spent;
My love doth grow more pure by your more trying,
And yet increaseth in the purifying.”
As far back as the fifteenth century a lover wore his ring on the
last or little finger.[310]
§ 3. It is said that Pope Innocent the Third was the first who
ordained the celebration of marriage in the church; before which, it
was totally a civil contract; hence arose dispensations, licenses,
faculties and other remnants of papal benefit.[311] Shelford[312]
observes it came with the Council of Trent. The Council sat within
the Bishopric of Trent, Germany, from the year 1545 to 1563.
But the ring was used in connection with marriage before Catholic
times. The Greeks had it. We find from Juvenal[313] that the Romans
employed the ring. There was commonly a feast on the signing of
the marriage contract; and the man gave the woman a ring (_annulus
pronubus_) by way of pledge, which she put upon her left hand, on
the finger next the least: because of the suggested nerve running
to the heart.[314] The ring was generally of iron, though sometimes
of copper and brass, with little knobs in the form of a key, to
represent that the wife had possession of the husband’s keys.[315]
Roman keys attached to a ring for the finger are not uncommon.[316]
The ring is at right angles to the axle and, therefore, it could only
be used for a lock which required very little strength to turn it or
as a latch-key. It may be a question, whether these were not rings
used on marriages?
[Illustration: (Roman Key Ring)]
Maffei gives a gem, upon which is engraved only the two Greek words
ΑΘΑΝΑΣΙ ΠΙΣΤΙΣ, in English, _Faith immortal_, which he considers as
intended to be set in a betrothal ring--in some one of those rings
which lovers gave to their beloved, with protestations of eternal
constancy, as a tacit promise of matrimony. Some Roman nuptial rings
had inscriptions, as _Ama me_; _Amo te_; _Bonam vitam_, etc. Among
other rings found at Pompeii were some which are considered to have
been wedding-rings.[317] One, of gold, picked up in Diomed’s house,
had a device representing a man and woman joining hands. Another, was
a double gold ring, in which two small green stones were set.
There is no evidence that the ring was used by the Egyptians at a
marriage.[318]
[Illustration: (Double Gold Ring)]
On the authority of a text in Exodus, wedding-rings are attempted to
be carried as far back as the Hebrews.[319] Leo of Modena, however,
maintains that they did not use any nuptial ring.[320] Selden owns
that they gave a ring in marriage, but that it was only in lieu of a
piece of money of the same value which had before been presented. It
probably was ring-money or money in the shape of a ring, (of which we
have before spoken.)
§ 4. The common use of the ring in different countries, when
betrothment or marriage takes place, is remarkable.
In Esthonia, a province of the Russian empire, where the girls
consider marriage the one great object to be coveted, attained and
prepared for from the earliest dawn of their susceptibilities, they
spin and weave at their outfit, frequently for ten years before their
helpmate is forthcoming: this outfit extends to a whole wardrobe
full of kerchiefs, gloves, stockings, etc. When they have formed an
acquaintance to their liking, the occasion having been usually of
their own creating, they look forward with impatience to the moment
of the proposal being made. But there is one season only, the period
of the new moon, when an offer can be tendered; nor is any time so
much preferred for a marriage as the period of the full moon. The
plenipos in the business of an offer are generally a couple of the
suitors’ friends or else his parents, who enter the maid’s homestead
with mead and brandy in their hands. On their approach the gentle
maiden conceals herself, warning having been given her in due form
by some ancient dame; the plenipos never make a direct announcement
of the purpose of their mission, but in most cases tell the girl’s
parents some story about a lamb or an ewe which has got astray and
they desire to bring home again. The parents immediately invite them
to drink, vowing that they know nothing of the stray creature; if
they decline to drink with them, it is a sign either that they have
no inclination for the match or that their daughter has whispered
them “her heart has no room for the youth in question.” But if all
are of one mind, the parents set merrily to work on the mead and
brandy and give the suitor’s envoys free license to hunt out the
stray lambkin. When caught, she is also expected to taste of the cup;
and from that moment the bridegroom becomes at liberty to visit his
bride. He makes his appearance, therefore, a few days afterwards,
bringing presents of all kinds with him, together with a ring, which
he places on the maiden’s finger as his betrothed.[321]
The Copts have a custom of betrothing girls at six or seven years
of age, which is done by putting a ring upon their finger; but
permission is afterwards obtained for her friends to educate her
until she arrives at years of discretion.[322]
In Persia, a ring is among the usual marriage presents on the part of
the bridegroom.[323]
It is said that in Spain every girl who has attained the age of
twelve may compel a young man to marry her, provided he has reached
his fourteenth year and she can prove, for instance, that he has
promised her his hand and given her to understand that he wished her
to become his wife. These proofs are adduced before an ecclesiastical
vicar. A present of a ring is considered sufficient proof to enable
the girl to claim her husband. If the vicar pronounces the marriage
ought to take place, the youth, who has been previously sent to
prison, cannot be liberated until after the celebration.[324]
Dr. Clark, in his Travels in Russia, describes the marriage, at
Ackmetchet, of Professor Pallas’s daughter with an Hungarian General
according to the rites of the Greek Church. After ascertaining as
to ties of blood between them and voluntary consent, a Bible and
crucifix were placed before them and large lighted wax tapers,
decorated with ribbons, put into their hands.
After certain prayers had been read and the ring put upon the bride’s
finger, the floor was covered by a piece of scarlet satin and a
table was placed before them with the communion vessels. The priest
having tied their hands together with bands of the same colored satin
and placed a chaplet of flowers upon their heads, administered the
sacrament and afterwards led them, thus bound together, three times
round the communion table followed by the bride’s father and the
bridesmaids. During this ceremony, the choristers chanted a hymn; and
after it was concluded, a scene of general kissing took place among
all present, etc.
§ 5. The betrothal of a young couple was formerly attended with
considerable ceremony, a portion of which was the exchange of rings.
Shakspeare alludes to this in the play of “_Twelfth Night_:”
“Strengthened by the interchangement of your rings.”